On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 15:48 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 12:40 PM, Bill Crawford
> <billcrawford1970@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > If you have multi-channel hardware that mixes itself, then using
> > PulseAudio sort of defeats the purpose of that hardware ;o)
>
> Such hardware is as far as I understand it, really no longer sold and
> has not been for some time, because it just makes more sense to do in
> software.

"The thing is, hardware mixing is a thing of the past, modern soundcards
don't do it anymore. Precisely for doing things like mixing in software
SIMD CPU extensions like SSE have been invented. Modern sound cards
these days are kind of "dumbed" down, high-quality DACs. They don't do
mixing anymore, many modern chips don't even do volume control anymore."

http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/jeffrey-stedfast.html

Dan

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Mon, 2008-09-15 at 00:33 -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> "The thing is, hardware mixing is a thing of the past, modern soundcards
> don't do it anymore. Precisely for doing things like mixing in software
> SIMD CPU extensions like SSE have been invented. Modern sound cards
> these days are kind of "dumbed" down, high-quality DACs. They don't do
> mixing anymore, many modern chips don't even do volume control anymore."

What, they still make sound cards? Onboard sound is still noisy as hell.

You can have my Aureal Vortex2 when you pry it from my cold dead hands,
or whenever they stop making PCI motherboards. (Have they already? I
haven't even looked. The last system I bought a few years back is an AGP
system since PCIe was much more expensive for no real gain at the
time...)
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Mon, 2008-09-15 at 01:19 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-09-15 at 00:33 -0400, Dan Williams wrote:
> > "The thing is, hardware mixing is a thing of the past, modern soundcards
> > don't do it anymore. Precisely for doing things like mixing in software
> > SIMD CPU extensions like SSE have been invented. Modern sound cards
> > these days are kind of "dumbed" down, high-quality DACs. They don't do
> > mixing anymore, many modern chips don't even do volume control anymore."
>
> What, they still make sound cards? Onboard sound is still noisy as hell.
>
> You can have my Aureal Vortex2 when you pry it from my cold dead hands,
> or whenever they stop making PCI motherboards. (Have they already? I

Not quite yet, but most vendors ship either half-and-half or just one or
two PCI slots, the rest are PCIe. Absolutely nobody ships AGP any more.

Dan

> haven't even looked. The last system I bought a few years back is an AGP
> system since PCIe was much more expensive for no real gain at the
> time...)
> --
> fedora-devel-list mailing list
> fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Friday, 12 September 2008 at 21:46, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> wrote:
> >
> > The problems we have right now are sufficiently sever to be
> > showstoppers. At the SpeakupModified.Org we recommend disabling
> > pulseaudio. As things stand in F-9, one gets no audio until after a user
> > logs in on the GUI. So, how are those who need screen reader support
> > supposed to use the a11y features of GDM? As it stands, there seems no
> > way to get console audio without that GUI login. Also a nonstarter in
> > the screen reader user community.
>
> If you want to run terminal applications, can't you just log in to a
> full screen gnome-terminal?

I can, but that's irrelevant. Why do you want to take my ability to
log in in text mode?

> > It seems a useful initial step toward resolution is to run pulseaudio
> > as a system daemon, via an init script, /sbin/service, /sbin/chkconfig.
> > The trade-offs vs the per user model that F-9 employs are probably more
> > than acceptable to most a11y users.
> >
> > So, let me simply ask ... Has anyone a working init script for
> > pulseaudio as a system daemon? Anything close that we could continue to
> > refine as an alternative configuration option for Fedora?
>
> We're going to be removing the legacy non-X system consoles by default
> in the long run.

Please tell me this is some kind of bad joke! Is Fedora becoming like
MS Windows? Just when Microsoft announced that you'll be able to install
Windows 7 without a GUI, you're announcing something opposite for Fedora?
Are you going to drive away people who like the textmode better?

Seriously, that would be one of the changes that would drive *me* away
from Fedora. Please don't do that. I like Fedora too much and I've invested
too much time in improving it for me.

Regards,
R.

--
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
Livna http://rpm.livna.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Le Sam 13 septembre 2008 00:59, Arthur Pemberton a écrit :
>
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org>
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Matthew Woehlke
>> <mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>>
>>> No,
>>> thanks; I'd rather have X fail to start and dump me at a normal
>>> console from
>>> which I can fix the problem *without rebooting*, much less needing
>>> to dig up
>>> a rescue disk :P.
>>
>> I believe we already do that today, and am not advocating removing
>> that functionality if possible. Anyways, I've said what I need to,
>> so
>> hopefully people won't be surprised later.
>
>
> I'm confused. Is Fedora really going to remove non X consoles?

Mid-term that wouln't be such a bad idea. Of course the replacements
need to prove their robustness.

--
Nicolas Mailhot


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Saturday, 13 September 2008 at 00:16, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:59 PM, Matthew Woehlke
> <mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> > Colin Walters wrote:
> >>
> >> We're going to be removing the legacy non-X system consoles by default
> >> in the long run.
> >
> > Um... what happens then when X is broken?
>
> What happens when the linux kernel is broken?

Bad analogy. You can work without X, but you can't without the kernel.

> What happens when /bin/sh is broken?

Use /bin/csh.

> What happens when NetworkManager is broken?

I still use the old network scripts. You will pry them from my rotting
fingers, but not before.

> You fix the bug.

Sure. If you can. If not, you file a bugreport, but in the meantime,
you want to be able to work.

> Also, one thing I would like to see Fedora install by default is a
> compressed recovery image, rather than just multiple kernels.

I don't want to have to reboot just to fix a typo in xorg.conf.
Did you spend too much time working on MS Windows?

Regards,
R.

--
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
Livna http://rpm.livna.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Saturday, 13 September 2008 at 00:52, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Matthew Woehlke
> <mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>
> > No,
> > thanks; I'd rather have X fail to start and dump me at a normal console from
> > which I can fix the problem *without rebooting*, much less needing to dig up
> > a rescue disk :P.
>
> I believe we already do that today, and am not advocating removing
> that functionality if possible.

You said you were, just the day before. Are you retracting your statement?

> Anyways, I've said what I need to, so hopefully people won't be surprised later.

Surprised by what, exactly? If you disable text mode log in, you'd better be
prepared to handle an enraged mob with torches and pitchforks, because this
is going to get ugly real soon.

Regards,
R.

--
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
Livna http://rpm.livna.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Saturday, 13 September 2008 at 01:02, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Arthur Pemberton <pemboa@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Matthew Woehlke
> >> <mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> No,
> >>> thanks; I'd rather have X fail to start and dump me at a normal console from
> >>> which I can fix the problem *without rebooting*, much less needing to dig up
> >>> a rescue disk :P.
> >>
> >> I believe we already do that today, and am not advocating removing
> >> that functionality if possible. Anyways, I've said what I need to, so
> >> hopefully people won't be surprised later.
> >
> >
> > I'm confused. Is Fedora really going to remove non X consoles?
>
> I'm talking about the direction and technology of the desktop product;
> what server images, embedded etc. do is an entirely different matter.

Except there are no "server images" in Fedora. And I want text mode
consoles on my desktop! Why do you want to remove them? You have been
asked several times already and provide no answers so far.

Regards,
R.

--
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
Livna http://rpm.livna.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Saturday, 13 September 2008 at 03:39, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 9:27 PM, Seth Vidal <skvidal@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 19:02 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> >
> >> I'm talking about the direction and technology of the desktop product;
> >> what server images, embedded etc. do is an entirely different matter.
> >
> >
> > Desktop Product? We don't make a desktop product.
>
> The live CD image, combined with the default comps tree from
> "gnome-desktop" is what I consider the desktop product.

So let me get this straight. You only want to disable text mode consoles
in the live CD spin? Why didn't you say so in the beginning? Even so,
it is still a bad idea.

> > We make a linux distribution.
>
> I am certainly not here to make a "linux distribution", which I
> consider a derogatory term.

What? Are you serious? I certainly am here to do that and I'm proud
of it. And I know many others who feel the same.

> It implies that all we do is take the
> linux kernel and a bunch of tarballs we found on the internet, compile
> them, and throw the binaries over the wall.

It implies no such thing. I don't know where you get your ideas, but
please keep them away from Fedora.

> The goal is rather to
> make a compelling and useful free desktop operating system.

"Useful" is the key word here. Why you insist on calling it "desktop"
OS, I don't know. Maybe you're not talking about Fedora.

> To do
> that, you need to make choices about how the operating system works,
> and how pieces fit together. If people want an OS that tries to
> support every possible configuration of every tarball that can be
> found on the Internet,

That's a non-sequitur and you know it. Giving users a distribution that
will allow them to run whatever software they want (regardless of whether
it is included in Fedora or not) is one of the goals of Fedora, but
this has nothing to do with text mode consoles being there or not.

> and is consequently near-paralyzed by choice
> and is only able to make releases every 5 years, debian.org is -->
> that way.

Apparently you don't listen to what users have to say. If you want to
support only a single configuration and deny users the choice,
apple.com is ---> that way. Or maybe microsoft.com. Definitely NOT
fedoraproject.org.

Regards,
R.

--
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
Livna http://rpm.livna.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Monday, 15 September 2008 at 12:35, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
>
> Le Sam 13 septembre 2008 00:59, Arthur Pemberton a écrit :
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org>
> > wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 6:36 PM, Matthew Woehlke
> >> <mw_triad@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> No,
> >>> thanks; I'd rather have X fail to start and dump me at a normal
> >>> console from
> >>> which I can fix the problem *without rebooting*, much less needing
> >>> to dig up
> >>> a rescue disk :P.
> >>
> >> I believe we already do that today, and am not advocating removing
> >> that functionality if possible. Anyways, I've said what I need to,
> >> so
> >> hopefully people won't be surprised later.
> >
> >
> > I'm confused. Is Fedora really going to remove non X consoles?
>
> Mid-term that wouln't be such a bad idea.

One would have to say why it is a good idea in the first place.

> Of course the replacements need to prove their robustness.

What replacements do you have in mind?

Regards,
R.

--
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
Livna http://rpm.livna.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
-- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list